A SCORE IS A START.
NOT A PROPHECY.
Nextfield compares how much selected career paths depend on human and physical work that generative AI does not complete on its own. Our scores are preliminary editorial judgments, informed by occupational task descriptions and official school information. They are not measured probabilities, validated predictions, or ILO scores.
Five factors. Equal weight.
Each career receives 0–4 points on each factor. Zero means little or no requirement; one means minor; two means mixed; three means substantial; four means essential to the path as described.
| Factor | What we consider |
|---|---|
| Physical execution | Working with materials, people, equipment, or conditions on site. |
| Human relationships | Trust, collaboration, teaching, negotiation, and interpersonal work. |
| Contextual judgment | Making decisions with incomplete information and specific local constraints. |
| Real-world accountability | Responsibility for implementation, safety, or consequential decisions. |
| Low digital substitutability | How much the buyer needs real-world delivery rather than an interchangeable digital output. |
Career score = sum of the five factors × 5. Each factor can contribute 20 points, for a maximum of 100. All inputs are visible when you open a career row.
Field score = the equal-weight average of its listed career scores, rounded to the nearest five. These are selected examples, not a statistically representative mix of graduate destinations. Adding a different career mix could change the result.
How to read the bands
- 0–40: more exposed. Digital work and repeatable outputs account for more of the assessed role.
- 45–60: mixed exposure. Digital tasks coexist with substantial human or physical requirements.
- 65–100: more human-dependent. The assessed role relies more heavily on people, physical conditions, or accountable decisions.
The bands are editorial conveniences, not scientific thresholds. A five-point difference should not determine a degree choice. Use the rationale, curriculum, and tradeoffs alongside the number.
Scope and uncertainty
This launch edition covers 12 creative fields and selected US undergraduate routes. We use a 3–5 year planning lens from October 2026. We focus on generative AI; robotics, recessions, wage competition, and other automation are not comprehensively modeled. All assessments currently have limited confidence: they have not been externally validated or calibrated against employment outcomes.
Human dependence does not prevent employers from reducing staff, and a physical task does not prevent buyers from choosing a digital substitute. Factors overlap, equal weights are a choice, and technology may change faster than the assessment. We round scores to avoid implying fine precision.
What the evidence supports
Official school pages verify degree names and pathways. BLS occupational descriptions inform our understanding of tasks. The ILO’s 2025 research informs the task-level framing and the distinction between exposure and replacement. None of these sources validates Nextfield’s numbers.
Recommendations and schools
Related fields are chosen for shared interests and transferable skills, then checked against field scores. We show higher-scoring alternatives when available. When none exists in the relevant launch catalog, we explicitly label adjacent options rather than claiming they are safer.
School selections are three relevant routes, not a top-three national ranking. Concentrations, adjacent degrees, and prerequisites are identified where relevant. Accreditation, licensure, admissions eligibility, and current availability should be confirmed with the school.
No school has paid for placement in the launch edition. Future sponsored listings will be labeled and will not change resilience scores.
Rubric version 1.0 · Assessment date: October 24, 2026